The Towerlight, April 25, 1980

tl19800425-000 "VOL. L10iIII No. 26 PUBLISHED BY THE STUDENTS OF TOWSON STATE 1UNIVERMY CONTENTS Sports 7 Features Entertainment 6 Classifieds 10 Week Watcher 4 Newsbriefs 10 April 25, 1980 Limit imposed Fee hike unlikely by Dana Bennett The Board of Trustees for State Colleges and Uni-versities recently approved a $25 ceiling of SGA fees for this year, but Steve Horn, SGA president, will not be able to raise the fee because of the Limit Amendment. The Limit Amendment forbids the SGA from accep-ting, appropriating or expending any funds taken from an SGA fee greater than the fee existing on March 1, 1980. Limit appeared on referendum on the ballot of the March SGA elections. lt passed favorably by a 528-209 student vote. The SGA fee as of March 1, 1980 was $23.25 for the year. The ceiling would allow the SGA to raise the fee to $25.00, which would be $1.75 increase, if they chose to do so. ""I can not initiate a fee increase according to the Limit Amendment as I read it,"" said Horn. Horn said the Limit does not, deal with proposing an increas, but it deals with the expanding of an SGA fee increase. Even though the ceiling has been approved, Horn said, he can not take advantage of it. ""Thre is no way that this SGA will defy the constitution, although we did not support the Limit Amendment we will abide by it since it is law."" said Horn. ""It is the SGA's decision as to whether or not they want to raise the fee,"" said Edward Consroe, dir-ector of financial operations. Consroe said that it is the SGA's business to de-cide how to raise the fees within their guidelines. contrnaed on page 12 Come on down! As temperatures soared near 80� this week, students gathered in the traditional spring hangout: the glen. On a sunny day, especially a Friday, students can almost always be guaranteed beer, pretzels and other assorted delicacies if they dare venture down the hill. TL photo by Cindy Sheesley Tower residents' kitchen bugged by Genene Morn Students who live on the 13th floor of the Residence Tower have reported to the housekeeping division that there are roaches in their kitchen. One resident first saw the roaches before spring break on the couch and the walls. ""When I turned the light off and on they ran back into the stove,"" she said. Other residents in quads on both sides of the kitchen began finding roaches in their rooms, though they said food is usually kept in air-tight containers. The students told their community assistant who wrote workorders which were then given to housekeep-ing. Several weeks before spring break Arthur Gray, supervisor of housing, sprayed under the stove in the kitchen with a commercial roach and bug spray. He did this after receiving one workorder. The spray was left in a cabinet for the residents' use. The residents said there was still a problem after spring break so more workorders were written. Housekeep-ers sprayed again on April 11. Also, Western Exterminators, a profession-al exterminator, sprayed on April 17. Western Exterminators comes to the dorms every three weeks to spray all public areas. The exterminators arrive in the morning when residents are in class or sleeping. Gray said he feels the problem ex-ists because the housekeepers cannot clean under the stove unless it is almost disassembled and because students often leave dirty dishes in the kitchen. He said he has checked with maintenance to see if something can be done to make the stove more acces-sible for housekeepers. No spraying or work can be done in the individual rooms unless a work-order is received specifically for that room, therefore no spraying was done in the room with roaches until the problem was brought to the attention of Louise Shulack, area coordinator. Roaches were not reported on any other floors of the Tower. Smith backs joint budget by Quincey R. Johnson President Hoke Smith said he ad-vocates the consolidation of the budget requests for the six member schools of the State Board of Trus-tees. Now, each institution that is un-der the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees submits individual bud-gets to the Board. The Board re-views each budget and submits each budget separately to the State Board for Higher Education and the state budget and fiscal planning de-partment. Smith said that a consolidation of the budgets would give the univer-sities more political strength. The Board of Trustees would hold a hearing with the six university presidents and from that hearing a unified budget would he made. With the consolidated budget, the Board of Trustees would be submitting to the governor a bud-get that is theirs and not one of six different schools, said Smith. Now, Smith added, the Board is not in the position to say to the governor that this is our stand, ac-cept it or turn it down. Kenneth Webb, fiscal adminstra-tor for the Board of Trustees, said that the Board of Trustees agrees that a budget consolidation would be a definite advantage. In Che preparation of the budget for fiscal yea 1982, there will be a change in directions. The SBHE, the state budget and fiscal planning department, and the Board of Trus-tees sends each institution a set of guidelines for budget preparation. In the past, each department sent different guidelines to the univer-sity; therefore, the university would have to prepare three separate bud-get request. This year the budget guidelines for each department are the same. The budget guidelines were sent to the institutions in late January. The budget request would reflect the number of additional dollars and positions required for fiscal year .1982, This initial request will not in-clude salary increments or inflation-ary increases. Salary increments are raises in pay that occur due to contractural agreements. In mid June, the governor will submit the Maximum Agency Re-quest Ceiling. Once the MARC is received, the final budget request can be made. This request would in-clude salary increments and infla-tion. Donald McCulloh, vice president for business and finance, said that given that we will not get all that we need, we must see what we can do to maintain quality. The University must make trade-offs and some con-tractions or deletions of programs, added McCulloh. The University must list each budget program for which addition-al dollars or positions are being re-quested in five separate areas. The areas are new programs, ex-pansion (contraction), enhancement, capital program operating expenses, and one time items. New programs include things that will be totally new for fiscal year 1982, or have not been funded in any previous year. The request must include an explanation of why the new program merits funding. Expansion and enhancement in-clude each existing program or bud-get initiation from fiscal year 1981 that needs additional funds. The ad-ditional request must be substani-ated. Capital program operating ex-penses means each item authorized in the capitol budget to be com-pleted during fiscal year 1982, or for which only partial funding was pro-vided in the previous fiscal year. One time items include new build-ing equipment. special major main-tenance items, or any other item that does not reflect ongoing need. The budget will be put together by August 15 and will be submitted to the Board of Trustees by Septem-ber first. Faculty faced with promotion and tenure crunch This is the first in a series examining the promotion and tenure crunch at Towson State. This week: reaction to the crunch. by Debbie Pelton Relief from the current promotion and tenure crunch affecting faculties at most higher education institutions, is just around the corner�almost. By 1995, grandchildren of people born during the fifties' ""baby boom"" will he college age. /V\ S'a Rising enrollments may increase faculty job opportunities and accel-erate the promotion and tenure rate. Until then, however, faculty members Will have to cope with the scarcity of Promotion and tenure slots. During the present transition, from a time when promotions were plenti-ful to a time of intense competition for few slots, faculty frustration is mount-ing. Perhaps more disturbing than the reality of the situation is the pessimistic mood among the faculty. Promotion and tenure seems the hottest issue among faculty today. Faculty members are concerned about promotion and tenure stan-dards, the process by which can-didates are evaluated and how they can retain incentive to pursue intel-lectual development without the promise of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow�a promotion or tenured position. Procedures written on paper can be very impressive. However, when they are applied, the original guidelines may be modified until they seem totally unrelated to the written text. Some faculty members feel that way abaut the University's promotion and tenure system. At best, depart-mental and divisional promotion and tenure committee members act pro-fessionally and fairly when evaluating a candidate. At worse, they can ""use the promotion and tenure process to reward friends and punish enemies,"" an assistant professor put it. One assistant professor said the promotion and tenure process is not In this issue The TSU base-ball team may have bloomed With the flowers of spring. They Won their third game last week. Story on page 7. The bawdy-ri-bald magic of Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream comes to the Fine Arts theater: Preview on page li. College students have always held strange jobs, but Lisa DiNike, whose job as a bathroom guard at the ./7"" Towson public library is euphemistically referred to as sitting on the key"" may be the strangest of all. Page 5. set up to encourage objectivity. Departmental promotion and tenure committee members ""are more likely to have the expertise"" to evaluate a colleague, ''but are less likely to demonstrate fairness than the divi-sional"" promotion and tenure com-mittee members, he said. Analysis Divisional promotion and tenure committee members, who represent a variety of disciplines, may lack necessary knowledge about a can-didate's field of study, but are ""more likely to demonstrate fairness,"" he said. ""Deans are more likely to be the fairest in review or appeal, but their ability to accurately assess creden-tials will vary tremendously for different faculty members,"" he said. Does it Help to Make Friends? One way to better one's chances for advancement is to win the heart of a departmental or divisional promotion and tenure committee mennber, ac-cording to some faculty members. ""Doing well at Towson State comes down to playing ball and kissing ass,"" commented one assistant professor. ""It helps to get to know the right peo-ple and go to the right parties,"" said another faculty member. At Towson, ""it's important to keep in line and keep your mouth shut,- said an assistant professor, ""because candor can get you burned."" Mass communication and speech department chairperson, Dr. Irene Shipman, said she does not see a sub-jective element in the departmental committee she serves on. She said departmental committee members ""exercise objectivity"" when eval-uating promotion candidates. Dr. Gilbert Brungardt, dean of arts and letters and communication arts and sciences, said members of the divisional promotion and tenure com-mittee which audits, take their task seriously and judge the candidates fairly. He said, ""I think it would be a real eye-opener for all faculty to serve on a divisional promotion and tenure com-mittee."" The committee members ''pick the one who looks best,"" and discuss only the candidates' profes-sional qualifications. Faculty members who are dissatis-fied with the present system should ""change it if they don't like it,"" said Brungardt. He said that, as in most situations when someone is denied something they think they deserve and have worked to achieve, the unchosen can-didates will find fault with individuals or the system instead of accepting defeat. Brungardt said he thinks faculty members are frustrated because many of them ""haven't recognized the fact that promotion and tenure conditions have changed. ""Now we're all stuck and we'll have to make the best of what we have,"" he said. Faculty members ""who give up trying will most likely not be pro-moted when there is an available slot,"" he said. Shipman said she realizes not all deserving faculty can be promoted, but thinks ""faculty have to go with the new ball game"" and accept the decline in available promotion slots. Dr. Hoke Smith said he thinks the present. promotion and tenure system is as fair and objective as possible. Smith said the two problems with promotion and tenure are that too many people are considered for pro-motions, creating unrealistic goals for unqualified candidates, and faculty have no role in the promotion or tenure.� decision after the divisional level. Lower Ranks Ilk Hardest Faculty at the lower two ranks, assistant professor and instructor, may be hardest hit by the promotion and tenure squeeze since the avail-able associate and full professor posi-tions are filled. Faculty members at the lower ranks have limited options For advancement. At last week's faculty meeting called by the President, Dr. Smith said he realizes faculty members at the lower ranks are ""embittered and frustrated"" because they may have to remain in rank for at least seven years before being promoted. He said seven years in rank seems reasonable for newer faculty and they should not expect promotion after being at Towson after three years. But some faculty members said they are concerned that absence of promotion possibilities will dull their incentive to remain intellectually active. One instructor said she abandoned plans to develop a new program because she is not sure how long she will be at Towson State considering the -bleak chances for promotion. ""Why invest my time and effort when there's no sure return?"" she said. ""What is there to keep me moti-vated to stay here?"" asked an assis-tant professor. ""I'm not going to bust my ass anymore,"" he said. (.onirnued tar page 2 Promotion guidelines The guidelines and procedures for Towson State's promotion and tenure system are spelled out in detail in the faculty handbook. The promotion process begins at the departmental level. Since all faculty members who meet the Board of Trustees' standards are eligible for promotion, a member of the faculty need not apply for promotion. However, once a department has recommended someone for promo-tion, a comprehensive evaluation becomes necessary. Faculty mem-bers are evaluated in two areas: teaching and professional respon-sibilities. Teaching is defined not only as per-formance in the classroom, but also includes activities such as field trips, supervising student projects and other functions appropriate to a credit course. Evaluation of a faculty member's professional responsibilities is broken into four areas: achievement of Ap-propriate formal degrees a doctorate or comparable degree), scholarly growth, service to the department and to the University (i.e., involvement in committees and special programs), and community-related activities. Recommendations for promotion originate in the department's rank committees, which are composed of the members of the department who hold higher rank than the person to be ev a I uated. Department chairpersons are mem-bers of all rank committees. Faculty members recommended by the departmental rank committee are next considered by the appropriate divisional promotion and tenure com-mittee. There is a divisional promo-tion and tenure committee for each of the five divisions within the Univer-sity. Members of the committee an elected by and from the division. All full-time faculty members with regular contracts may vote for rep-resentatives to their divisional com-mittee. No one may serve on both the divisional committee and the Univer-sity promotion and tenure committee Committee members serve three. year terms. Divisional committee members are expected to serve as representatives of the University not their particular department, therefore department chairpersons cannot be members o, divisional committees. It is the responsibility of the divi. sional P&T committee to review and approve or disapprove all recommen-dations from the departments. The committee will also rank-order all o: its recommendations for promotion and forward theni to the Dean of tht University. All voting in the committee meet ings must be open. The final decision on promotions is made by the Dean of the University. "